Looking a buying a CX-5

[Bunnyman]

Probably not the best forum to ask as no doubt I will get a biased opinion as you all probably love your CX-5's to death but is there anything that may be a problem with this SUV and to check out before I buy? I drove a CX-5 Akera (top of the range in AUS) petrol 2.5L but I thought it was underpowered and sluggish. I wish to try the 2.2L Turbo-Diesel as reading reviews says this is a much more responsive and quicker engine and uses only 5.7 L per 100Km.

I was also looking at a Landrover Freelander 2 but this seems to more for off-road use even though it is labelled an SUV.

I have read something about "autolocking" of the SatNav and this concerns me. Is this a big issue and does it provide voice navigation?

I didn't notice if it came with a CD stacker or just a single CD player. Apparently you can use a USB drive and play music from that..

 

[xtrailman]

Have a look at this Aus site.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=2040594&p=67

I monitor that one for the diesel issues, and this one for the petrol.

 

[paris1]

I would caution you about rushing to judgement on the CX-5's power from a quick test drive-particularly with the automatic transmission. Newcomers to the SkyActiv drive train generally are not prepared for the autobox's tendency to "short-shift" in it's effort to maximize fuel economy. Once you acclimate to the workings of the trans (and it does to your driving style) you will find this powertrain has more oomph than you initially thought, even with the smaller 2.0 litre engine. Spend some quality time with it on an extended test drive.

 

[dad of jon]

Probably not the best forum to ask as no doubt I will get a biased opinion as you all probably love your CX-5's to death but is there anything that may be a problem with this SUV and to check out before I buy? I drove a CX-5 Akera (top of the range in AUS) petrol 2.5L but I thought it was underpowered and sluggish. I wish to try the 2.2L Turbo-Diesel as reading reviews says this is a much more responsive and quicker engine and uses only 5.7 L per 100Km.

I was also looking at a Landrover Freelander 2 but this seems to more for off-road use even though it is labelled an SUV.

I have read something about "autolocking" of the SatNav and this concerns me. Is this a big issue and does it provide voice navigation?

I didn't notice if it came with a CD stacker or just a single CD player. Apparently you can use a USB drive and play music from that..

the autolocking is a USA setting I believe.

I have the 380nm version of the 2.2D it's very good. the 420nm 4wd version even more so, but in the uk you have to go 4wd and leather & 19" wheels for that (unamused)

 

[Sassimac]

Hi There...

I just purchased the AU version 2.2L diesel Grand Tourer. And it is a superb fella. I did drive the 2.5L version, but seriously after you try the diesel, you won't go back!

If you want to save about $2000, drop the Akera for the GT model. The only things you loose are Blind Spot monitoring, lane Departure and auto dimming headlights. I could not justify those feature for a metro driven car.

The GT model has the nine speaker Bose system, which can do streaming music via Bluetooth or USB.

 

[123373]

Car and Driver just recorded a 7.6 0-60 time with the 2.5 gas engine.

 

[nXt]

Car and Driver just recorded a 7.6 0-60 time with the 2.5 gas engine.

Thanks for the heads up. New article here: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-mazda-cx-5-25-awd-test-review
0-60 7.6sec for the 2.5 AWD

 

[xtrailman]

While that's faster than the diesel, is the 30-50 quicker, or the 50-70mph.

In other words real world use, over taking etc.

 

[V8toilet]

I would caution you about rushing to judgement on the CX-5's power from a quick test drive-particularly with the automatic transmission. Newcomers to the SkyActiv drive train generally are not prepared for the autobox's tendency to "short-shift" in it's effort to maximize fuel economy. Once you acclimate to the workings of the trans (and it does to your driving style) you will find this powertrain has more oomph than you initially thought, even with the smaller 2.0 litre engine. Spend some quality time with it on an extended test drive.

Much agreed!

 

[123373]

While that's faster than the diesel, is the 30-50 quicker, or the 50-70mph.

In other words real world use, over taking etc.

30 to 50 3.7
50 to 70 5.3

 

[xtrailman]

30 to 50 3.7
50 to 70 5.3

Whatcar.com tested a auto 175hp diesel.

30-50 = 3.3 sec
50-70 = 5.1 sec
30-70 = 8.2 sec
0-60 = 8.3 sec
top speed = 120 mph
True MPG average = 46.3 mpg English


The new 2.5 petrol sounds a sound choice.

 

[tibimakai]

Motor Trend shows 8.1 sec to 60 for the 2.5L. What's up with these differences? Usually they test the GT, which it should be heavier then the Touring, so with the Touring we can expect 7.2 sec to 60?

I don't have one yet, but I'm planning to get a Touring pretty soon.

 

[paris1]

Motor Trend shows 8.1 sec to 60 for the 2.5L. What's up with these differences? Usually they test the GT, which it should be heavier then the Touring, so with the Touring we can expect 7.2 sec to 60?

I don't have one yet, but I'm planning to get a Touring pretty soon.

The GT is not appreciably heavier than the Touring, drivelines being equal.

 

[xtrailman]

I've read six group tests for the diesel version.
Performance figures vary slightly in each one, various reasons, trim level, power output, and test conditions.

Same thing with the brake tests, and cabin noise, all seem to vary.

Motor Trend shows 8.1 sec to 60 for the 2.5L. What's up with these differences? Usually they test the GT, which it should be heavier then the Touring, so with the Touring we can expect 7.2 sec to 60?

I don't have one yet, but I'm planning to get a Touring pretty soon.